Following is a suggested template for reporting anti-Islam posts and other posts which disparage other faiths:

Provision 2.d. of the TOS on this forum prohibits, among other things: "Unsubstantiated allegations against individuals or traditions." This post and other similar posts by this Member violate TOS by making unsubstantiated allegations against the tradition of Islam.

I encourage Members to speak out.

I have no problem with this rule. The claims about Muhammad are very well substantiated, because they are backed up by the canonical scriptures of islam. There is no need to be inflamatory because this is a buddhist forum and because incendiary style is counterproductive. But how do you tell the truth about Muhammad without upseting some people, even by just quoting canonical sources? That is not possible, unfortunately.

It seems very inappropriate to "tell the truth about Muhammad" in the manner which has been done here, using for substantiation facts which may be in dispute, with the ultimate goal of disparaging Islam. This is not a discussion of Dhamma. I think "connections with other paths" contemplates finding where there are points of connection, not how we can put down other faiths.

This should not be confused with endorsement of religious persecution. This should not be confused with characterizing muslims as if they are all the same as Muhammad, or saying that they're all evil, because clearly they are not.

When there is a thread about the perfection of Rohingya Muslims and Buddhists start talking about all the excuses for why such persecution might be justified (e.g., the Rohingya's past-life culpability) and denying that Buddhists are carrying out the persecution, then comments are an implicit endorsement of religious persecution.

... The only way this can happen is if the islamic doctrines that encourage these crimes are criticized. And it includes a severe criticism of Muhammad as a (bad) moral example for today's world.

I am sorry if this offends, but the comment is ignorant. There is good and bad in any presentation of one's faith (as evidenced here on DW by the Buddhist "proselytizers" who sometimes come out of the woodwork), but one visit to your neighborhood mosque may help you to realize that any perceived examples of rape or pedophile or the other absurdities which have been pointed out here on DW as the truth about Muhammed are not the examples which Muslims in general follow. The discussions here on DW have crossed the line over, and over, and over again into something ugly, particularly at a time when Muslims are persecuted at the hands of self-identified Buddhists. We should be setting a better example here.

If you want to prevent others from reading unpleasant truths, then you are leaving the minorities within the muslim minority to rot under the islamofascist regimes and/or laws.

Disparaging Islam (and Christianity, and Bahai, among perhaps other faiths) on a Buddhist discussion forum devoted to Dhamma certainly will not help these individuals. To me it sounds more like an excuse for Islam-bashing.

I could make an unfortunately long list of the things that ofend me about islam and the apologists for islamic fundamentalism. So, even then, your ofense would not surpass mine.

And none of your long list should have any place on a Buddhist forum devoted to discussion of Dhamma. We should create an environment which is welcoming to Muslims who may wish to hear the Dhamma. We certainly have not done this at DW.

Acknowledge that the majority of victims of Islam are actually Muslims. If you weren't aware of that, let it sink in for a few moments before you lash out at someone for being critical of Islam.

We are all victims when we allow unjust and hurtful speech to go unanswered. I would love to is Muslims join the Dhamma conversation here and offer their perspective, but I image most would rather stay away, given the tone which has been set here. It is very unfortunate for a Forum devoted to Dhamma discussion.

Who has engaged in such conflation in order to smear others? I have not seen this done, but perhaps I missed it.

It's a regular occurrence, especially when Islam and politics are discussed. I'm speaking generally here, not about anyone in particular - more the general propensity for people to emotionally lash out, conflate moderate positions with extreme ones, and expect authorities to squash expressions of speech that offend their feelings and sensibilities.

I would love to is Muslims join the Dhamma conversation here and offer their perspective, but I image most would rather stay away, given the tone which has been set here. It is very unfortunate for a Forum devoted to Dhamma discussion.

And the teachings of Islam are "very unfortunate", when assessed against the Buddha's teachings. So what of it?... should such truth be shut down, lest it might offend these hypothetical Muslims who you think might actually want to talk about the Dhamma?

I'm not particularly interested in other religions, but when (as has been pointed out above) it is written into the scriptures of certain religions that infidels (i.e. most people on Earth) are to be killed, is it somehow "lacking in compassion" or "intolerant" to state that such a view is unacceptable? Did the Buddha not speak out against Wrong View, especially when it was so diabolical and genocidal?

Personally, what I would ask people to do is to clearly differentiate between:

Islam - the doctrine, the scripture, the ideas
Muslims - followers of Islam
Islamists - those who wish to force Islam on the world

-------------------------If you're inclined to criticize...

Criticize Islam dispassionately as you would criticize any other ideology or view. Try to use logic, reason, sources etc. in order to make a cohesive argument.

Similarly, call out Islamists for their extremism, violence, intolerance of infidels and efforts to enforce the brutality of Sharia Law on others.

Recognize that most Muslims are not Islamists, and just want to live a peaceful and happy life, like you.

Please, do not criticize Muslims in toto. Each person should be judged by their own actions, not those of others who share the same label.

If you're inclined to complain about the criticism...

Recognize the distinctions between Islam, Muslims and Islamists. Do not wilfully conflate them in order to smear your opponent as Islamophobic.

Do not prove your opponents views about censorship of criticism of Islam right, by using ad-hominem labels in an attempt to shut down uncomfortable discussion.

Acknowledge that the majority of victims of Islam are actually Muslims. If you weren't aware of that, let it sink in for a few moments before you lash out at someone for being critical of Islam.
-------------------------

Just as it is throughout the forum "play the ball, not the man".

To the critics, criticise Islam, not Muslims.
To the critics of the critics, refute the arguments, and don't play identity politics by smearing the individual for expressing a view that you don't like.
To all, please report actual TOS violations. Please don't weaponize the function in an attempt to silence perspectives that you personally disagree with.

Metta,
Paul.

"Does Master Gotama have any position at all?"

"A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away with. What a Tathagata sees is this: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is perception...such are fabrications...such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.'" - Aggi-Vacchagotta Sutta

And the teachings of Islam are "very unfortunate", when assessed against the Buddha's teachings. So what of it?... should such truth be shut down, lest it might offend these hypothetical Muslims who you think might actually want to talk about the Dhamma?

This is not a black-and-white choice between no discussion versus unfettered Islam-bashing. As Buddhists on a Buddhist discussion forum, I believe it is not our place to dismiss all the the teachings of Islam as "very unfortunate." I understand you disagree with this, and this is perhaps why you have allowed highly offensive commentary about Islam.

Sure, if you wish to suck all good will out of life through a crusade of reforming idioms in the name of political correctness.

Since when is gender equality and women's empowerment a question of "political correctness"? Of course you are welcome to continue to use gender-biased idioms if you wish. But being mindful of the way men speak about women certainly is not an effort to "suck all good will out of life," as you put it (rather disturbingly). I get it that Buddhism is traditionally male-dominated.

I have noticed that most people who employ the term "political correctness" do it for the purpose of seeking empowerment to say things which are offensive or potentially offensive. I understand very well that somehow, perhaps by virtue of some twisted understanding of "anatta," many Buddhists here feel they bear no personal responsibility for the effect their words might have on others.

Since when is gender equality and women's empowerment a question of "political correctness"?

So you really think your PC nit-picking about a well-established idiom somehow advanced the cause of women's empowerment? Really?

If you really want to advance the cause of women's empowerment then speak out against the brutality of Sharia Law, female genital mutilation, child brides, the stoning of rape victims, women being used as chattel and sex slaves, women being blown up and otherwise killed or dislocated through acts of terror, subjugation, lesbians being thrown off cliffs and buildings etc.

When "political correctness" involves miguidedly placing emphasis on feelings, over the types of brutality described above, then something is very wrong.

If you really want to advance the cause of women's empowerment then speak out against the brutality of Sharia Law, female genital mutilation, child brides, the stoning of rape victims, women being used as chattel and sex slaves, women being blown up and otherwise killed through acts of terror, subjugation, lesbians being thrown off cliffs and buildings etc.

This is whataboutism. It also is further Islam bashing which, in my opinion, should have no place on a discussion forum devoted to Dhamma. The horrible things listed above occur. If your neighborhood mosque proposed a meeting with Buddhists for dialogue and finding connections with other paths, would you really put these at the top of your agenda?

Your whataboutism is a diversionary tactic to change the subject and divert attention away from what you have perceived as criticism of yourself. This is exactly what Trump does.

You can expect the Terms of Service to be executed, independently of your incessant complaining and moralizing.

I understand you do not welcome my perspective. I understand that TOS will continue to be interpreted to allow reprehensible and unfair commentary about other faiths. I do not understand how you think this promotes Dhamma discussion.

Will you tolerate "dismissing most of the teachings of Islam as very unfortunate?" Or maybe some of the teachings... or perhaps very icky or...?

Please let us know what our 'place' is, for you seem to have a clear notion of that; for we would not wish to offend L.N. and the Muslims on the site.

I understand that you wish to have the unfettered ability to bash other faiths on this forum, and you have it, so why does it matter? Just say what you want, regardless of the potential harm your words might have. No need to feel any sense of personal responsibility for what you say.

L.N.,
Given a HYPOTHETICAL example of a society where its moral attitude is derived from its religion and which espouses female genital mutilation, child brides, the stoning of rape victims, women being used as chattel and sex slaves, women being blown up and otherwise killed or dislocated through acts of terror, subjugation, lesbians being thrown off cliffs and buildings etc.........given this HYPOTHETICAL example, then what are we to do? Are we to remain silent? Are we to force others to remain silent?
chownah

I'm not particularly interested in other religions, but when (as has been pointed out above) it is written into the scriptures of certain religions that infidels (i.e. most people on Earth) are to be killed, is it somehow "lacking in compassion" or "intolerant" to state that such a view is unacceptable? Did the Buddha not speak out against Wrong View, especially when it was so diabolical and genocidal?..... call out Islamists for their extremism, violence, intolerance of infidels and efforts to enforce the brutality of Sharia Law on others.....
Acknowledge that the majority of victims of Islam are actually Muslims. If you weren't aware of that, let it sink in for a few moments before you lash out at someone for being critical of Islam.

What scripture calls for the killing of all “infudels?” Certainly not the Koran’s “there is no compulsion in religion.” Are you referring to the genocide in Myanmar or the Buddhist monk led attacks on Hindus, Christians, and Muslims in Sri Lanka? Those have been justified by quoting scripture. Well, we all know who quotes (selectively and out of context) scripture in the old saying.

It is indeed intolerant to falsely ascribe such a belief to a whole religion when it is so easy to determine that it is false. If someone claimed that Jews sacrifice Christian children on Passover would we not assume that person was an intolerant anti-Semite or repeating historic anti-Semitic slanders?

Sharia law is a catch all term for legal systems with varying applications ranging from identical to kosher hygienic laws to contract law to felonies and more as such it cannot be called brutal or kind. I assume you are all aware that genital mutilation is not supported by Sharia, women’s rights in Sharia were far superior to those in contemporaneous European law, and that societies based on it were far more religiously tolerant by law than European societies (hence Jews expelled from Spain fled to Turkish rule).

Most Muslims would not agree that they are victims of Islam or that “Islamist” meant terrorist. It is a term often used by those wishing to smear all followers of Islam, although this may not be your intent It is very, very true and well known that the vast majority of the victims of ISIS, Al Quaeda and similar lunatic thugs, who wish to impose their own savage rule on Muslims have been Muslim as have been those who died fighting them.

All Muslims are not saints; all Muslims are not devils.

Last edited by Caodemarte on Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:44 am, edited 1 time in total.

Those activities I spoke of are activities endorsed, promoted and encouraged by the teachings of Islam.

I wish it were otherwise, but it's not.

If you're happy to give a free pass to such barbarism because speaking against it might hurt someone's feelings, then I'm glad I don't share your priorities.

I don't give a free pass to them. However, I would choose not to highlight them on a Buddhist discussion forum devoted to discussing Dhamma. I understand you feel very strongly otherwise and believe it is your personal duty to be the judge of Islam. I understand you value this much more than creating a friendly, welcoming place where a Muslim would feel invited and, perhaps hear the Dhamma.

In the context of the persecution of Rohingya Muslims at the hands of self-identified Buddhists, I believe the position you have adopted is extremely unfortunate. I understand we can expect the disparagement of other faiths to continue unabated here on DW, with the blessing of the administrator, as it apparently has for years. This is a real misuse of what otherwise is a great resource.

L.N.,
Given a HYPOTHETICAL example of a society where its moral attitude is derived from its religion and which espouses female genital mutilation, child brides, the stoning of rape victims, women being used as chattel and sex slaves, women being blown up and otherwise killed or dislocated through acts of terror, subjugation, lesbians being thrown off cliffs and buildings etc.........given this HYPOTHETICAL example, then what are we to do? Are we to remain silent? Are we to force others to remain silent?
chownah

Given that this is a Buddhist discussion forum devoted to discussing Dhamma, we can find avenues elsewhere to decry these foul practices. By emphasizing them in virtually every discussion of Islam here, we paint a very poor picture of Buddhist tolerance for other faiths.

L.N.,
Given a HYPOTHETICAL example of a society where its moral attitude is derived from its religion and which espouses female genital mutilation, child brides, the stoning of rape victims, women being used as chattel and sex slaves, women being blown up and otherwise killed or dislocated through acts of terror, subjugation, lesbians being thrown off cliffs and buildings etc.........given this HYPOTHETICAL example, then what are we to do? Are we to remain silent? Are we to force others to remain silent?
chownah

Since all these actions have actually occurred in the US whose media I do read and have been publically promoted as being based on Christianity, are you referring to the US? India or Sri Lanka, perhaps, or any other country where the unscrupulous rationalize their crimes in the name of religion. I think it will be more difficult to find a society free of such crimes and such justifications.

L.N.,
Given a HYPOTHETICAL example of a society where its moral attitude is derived from its religion and which espouses female genital mutilation, child brides, the stoning of rape victims, women being used as chattel and sex slaves, women being blown up and otherwise killed or dislocated through acts of terror, subjugation, lesbians being thrown off cliffs and buildings etc.........given this HYPOTHETICAL example, then what are we to do? Are we to remain silent? Are we to force others to remain silent?
chownah

Since all these actions have actually occurred in the US whose media I do read and have been publically promoted as being based on Christianity, are you referring to the US? India or Sri Lanka, perhaps, or any other country where the unscrupulous rationalize their crimes in the name of religion. I think it will be more difficult to find a society free of such crimes and such justifications.

Am I referring to what? Did you read my post. I am referring to a hypothetical example.
chownah

L.N.,
Given a HYPOTHETICAL example of a society where its moral attitude is derived from its religion and which espouses female genital mutilation, child brides, the stoning of rape victims, women being used as chattel and sex slaves, women being blown up and otherwise killed or dislocated through acts of terror, subjugation, lesbians being thrown off cliffs and buildings etc.........given this HYPOTHETICAL example, then what are we to do? Are we to remain silent? Are we to force others to remain silent?
chownah

Given that this is a Buddhist discussion forum devoted to discussing Dhamma, we can find avenues elsewhere to decry these foul practices. By emphasizing them in virtually every discussion of Islam here, we paint a very poor picture of Buddhist tolerance for other faiths.

The discussion here is not limited to discussing the dhamma.
There are muslims who do not support the abhorrant actions mentioned. It would be good if someone could find out how they self identify as muslim and don't support those acts.....and then post it here.
chownah

When reading some of these posts it becomes clear some of these people have never had any Muslim friends, and when you hear there opinions, it becomes clear why they don't have any Muslim friends. It is a position of weakness in one's faith to criticize other religions, if you are secure in your beliefs you should not need to criticize everyone else's beliefs.

18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John

the numerous islamic terror organizations and apparently relatively widespread sympathy for them among muslims here and there throughout the world certainly don't help...

The terror organisations have been historically created & funded by the British & American empires, starting from WW1, when the British supported the violent fundamentalist Wahhabi Saudi against the secular Ottoman Empire. This is where the problem lies. The American terror (death squads) has been unleashed in countless countries.

Why should mainstream Islam be seen as more authoritative than the Islam of the Talibans?

Mainstream Islam is secular; as described in the Koran & as demonstrated throughout Islamic history. It should particularly be noted Buddhism, while sometimes persecuted, remained in existence in the Islamic Empire up to around the 12 century, until it was destroyed by the Mongols, who were recent converts to Islam & originally appeared to be Buddhists. In their invasions of the Islamic Empire, before moving on to India, the Mongols slaughtered many Muslims & Persians. See link for starters then DYOR: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecuti ... by_Muslims

Taliban Islam was assorted lunatics & pyschopaths recruited, trained, funded & armed by the USA; similar to ISIS. Naturally, for some Americans, due to cognitive dissonance, Taliban is more authoritative because it is 'Made In the USA', both militarily & by mass media.

In the field of psychology, cognitive dissonance is the mental discomfort (psychological stress) experienced by a person who simultaneously holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values. The occurrence of cognitive dissonance is a consequence of a person performing an action that contradicts personal beliefs, ideals, and values; and also occurs when confronted with new information that contradicts said beliefs, ideals, and values.

When reading some of these posts it becomes clear some of these people have never had any Muslim friends, and when you hear there opinions, it becomes clear why they don't have any Muslim friends. It is a position of weakness in one's faith to criticize other religions, if you are secure in your beliefs you should not need to criticize everyone else's beliefs.

I very much agree with this. We are on a Buddhist discussion forum. It is not clear to me how these criticisms and negative comments about Islam and other faiths are in any way appropriate in this forum. There are other avenues available. As far as I can tell, the post in which it is suggested that Muhammad be urinated upon is still visible here on DW. Very discouraging.